Una revisione narrativa della produzione linguistica: l’impatto del Paradigma Picture Word Interference
Parole chiave:
Produzione linguistica, Picture word interference, Attivazione per competizione, attentioneAbstract
Con questa revisione di impronta narrativa si è cercato di dare un quadro generale ad uno dei processi cognitivi più complessi conosciuti, ossia quello del linguaggio. Più nel dettaglio è stata indagata la programmazione dell’atto comunicativo e gli effetti ad essa correlati (esempio l’Interferenza Semantica, il peso della Classe Grammaticale). A tal fine è stato considerato su uno dei paradigmi sperimentali che ha avuto maggior impatto nella ricerca sul linguaggio, il paradigma del Picture Word Interference (PWI). Questo paradigma prevede l’utilizzo di figure da denominare messe a confronto con delle parole che fungono da distrattori che devono essere ignorate. Con lo sviluppo del PWI si è potuto comprendere maggiormente questo processo così ampio, ponendo l’accento sul concetto di Attivazione per Competizione che allo stato delle conoscenze attuali risulta essere una delle più accreditate ipotesi per la comprensione del fenomeno di interesse, sostenendo il modello WEAVER++ di Levelt e colleghi del 1999. All’interno del lavoro, viene discusso inoltre il peso dell’attenzione, che risulta avere una importante relazione con la funzione linguistica per la selezione dei Lemmi giusti.
doi: 10.53240/2024topic3.044.001
Riferimenti bibliografici
Barch, D. M., Braver, T. S., Sabb, F. W., & Noll, D. C. (2000). Anterior Cingulate and the Monitoring of Response Conflict: Evidence from an fMRI Study of Overt Verb Generation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 298–309.
Bürki, A., & Madec, S. (2022). Picture-word interference in language production studies: Exploring the roles of attention and processing times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(7), 1019.
Caramazza, A. (1997). How Many Levels of Processing Are There in Lexical Access? Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14(1), 177-208.
Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2000). The semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm: does the response set matter?. Cognition, 75(2), B51-B64.
Caramazza, A., & Costa, A. (2001). Set size and repetition in the picture–word interference paradigm: Implications for models of naming. Cognition, 80(3), 291-298.
Caramazza, A., Miozzo, M., Costa, A., Schiller, N., & Alario, F. (2002). A crosslinguistic investigation of determiner production.
Chomsky, N. (2010). Il Linguaggio e la mente. Torino: Bollati Borighieri Editore.
Costa, A., Mahon, B., Savova, V., & Caramazza, A. (2003). Level of categorisation effect: A novel effect in the picture-word interference paradigm. Language and cognitive processes, 18(2), 205-234.
Costa, A., Alario, F. X., & Caramazza, A. (2005). On the categorical nature of the semantic interference effect in the picture-word interference paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 125-131.
De Martino, M., Mancuso, A., & Laudanna, A. (2018). Grammatical Class Effects in Production of Italian Inflected Verbs. In CLiC-it.
De Simone, F., Collina, S. (2016). The Picture–Word Interference Paradigm: Grammatical Class Effects in Lexical Production. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 45(5), 1003-1019.
Declerck, M., Meade, G., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., Roelofs, A., & Emmorey, K. (2021). On the connection between language control and executive control—an ERP study. Neurobiology of Language, 2(4), 628-646.
Dell, G.S., O’Seaghdha, P.G. (1992). Stages of lexical access in language production. Cognition, 42, 287-314
Dell, G. S., Oppenheim, G. M., & Kittredge, A. K. (2008). Saying the right word at the right time: Syntagmatic and paradigmatic interference in sentence production. Language and cognitive processes, 23(4), 583-608.
Dell’Acqua, R., Job, R., Peressotti, F., & Pascali, A. (2007). The picture-word interference effect is not a Stroop effect. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 14, 717-722.
Deutsch, A., Dank, M. (2019). Morphological structure mediates the notional meaning of gender marking: Evidence from the gender-congruency effect in Hebrew speech production. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(3), 389-402.
Ferreira, V., and Pashler, H. (2002). Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem.Cogn. 28, 1187–1199.
Ferreira, J., Roelofs, A., Freches, G. B., & Piai, V. (2023). An fMRI study of inflectional encoding in spoken word production: Role of domain-general inhibition. Neuropsychologia, 188, 108653.
Finkbeiner, M., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Now you see it, now you don't: On turning semantic interference into facilitation in a Stroop-like task. Cortex, 42(6), 790-796.
Garrett, M. F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 133-177). Academic Press.
Hustá, C., Zheng, X., Papoutsi, C., & Piai, V. (2021). Electrophysiological signatures of conceptual and lexical retrieval from semantic memory. Neuropsychologia, 161, 107988.
Janssen, N., Schirm, W., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). Semantic interference in a delayed naming task: evidence for the response exclusion hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(1), 249.
Janssen, N., Melinger, A., Mahon, B. Z., Finkbeiner, M., & Caramazza, A. (2010). The word class effect in the picture–word interference paradigm. Quarterly Journal of experimental psychology, 63(6), 1233-1246.
Lanczik, M., & Keil, G. (1991). Carl Wernicke's localization theory and its significance for the development of scientific psychiatry. History of psychiatry, 2(6), 171-180.
Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A. & Meyer, A.S. (1999). A theory of Lexical Access in speech production. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75
Levy, R. S. (1977). The question of electrophysiological asymmetries preceding speech. In Studies in Neurolinguistics (Vol. 3, pp. 287–318). Elsevier.
Lupker, S. J. (1979). The semantic nature of response competition in the picture-word interference task. Memory & Cognition, 7(6), 485-495.
MacLeod, C. M., & MacDonald, P. A. (2000). Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(10), 383-391.
Mancuso, A., De Martino, M., & Laudanna, A. (2016). Semantic priming effects in Italian verbs recognition: the role of grammatical classes and semantic categories. CLiC it, 195.
Mascelloni, M., McMahon, K. L., Piai, V., Kleinman, D., & de Zubicaray, G. (2021). Mediated phonological–semantic priming in spoken word production: Evidence for cascaded processing from picture–word interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(7), 1284-1294.
McAdam, D. W., & Whitaker, H. A. (1971). Language production: Electroencephalographic localization in the normal human brain. Science, 172(3982), 499-502.
Meyer, A. S. (1996). Lexical access in phrase and sentence production: Results from picture–word interference experiments. Journal of memory and Language, 35(4), 477-496.
Meyer, A. S., Roelofs, A., & Levelt, W. J. (2003). Word length effects in object naming: The role of a response criterion. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 131-147.
Miozzo, M., & Caramazza, A. (2003). When more is less: A counterintuitive effect of distractor frequency in the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(2), 228.
Nozari, N., & Pinet, S. (2020). A critical review of the behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological studies of co-activation of representations during word production. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 53, 100875.
Pechmann, T., & Zerbst, D. (2002). The activation of word class information during speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(1), 233.
Peterson, R. R., & Savoy, P. (1998). Lexical selection and phonological encoding during language production: Evidence for cascaded processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(3), 539–557.
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Schriefers, H. (2011). Semantic interference in immediate and delayed naming and reading: Attention and task decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(4), 404-423.
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Schriefers, H. (2012). Distractor strength and selective attention in picture-naming performance. Memory & Cognition, 40, 614-627.
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., Acheson, D. J., & Takashima, A. (2013). Attention for speaking: Domain-general control from the anterior cingulate cortex in spoken word production. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 832.
Piai, V., Roelofs, A., & Roete, I. (2015). Semantic interference in picture naming during dual-task performance does not vary with reading ability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(9), 1758-1768.
Piai, V., Klaus, J., & Rossetto, E. (2020). The lexical nature of alpha-beta oscillations in context-driven word production. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 55, 100905.
Piai, V., & Borges, P. (2023). The Electrophysiology of Language Production. In Language Production (pp. 143-167). Routledge.
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Research on attention networks as a model for the integration of psychological science. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, 1-23.
Rabovsky, M., Schad, D. J., & Abdel Rahman, R. (2021). Semantic richness and density effects on language production: Electrophysiological and behavioral evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(3), 508–517.
Reynolds, M., and Besner, D. (2006). Reading a loud is not automatic: processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print. J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform. 32, 1303–1323.
Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. (1998). A case for the lemma/lexeme distinction in models of speaking: Comment on Caramazza and Miozzo (1997). Cognition, 69(2), 219-230.
Roelofs, A. (2000). Attention to action: Securing task-relevant control in spoken word production. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 411-416).
Roelofs, A. (2001). Set size and repetition matter: Comment on Caramazza and Costa (2000). Cognition, 80(3), 283-290.
Roelofs, A. (2003). Modeling the relation between the production and recognition of spoken word forms. Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities, 115-158.
Roelofs, A. (2005). Spoken word planning, comprehending, and self-monitoring: Evaluation of WEAVER++. In Phonological encoding and monitoring in normal and pathological speech (pp. 54-76). Psychology Press.
Roelofs, A. (2006). Context effects of pictures and words in naming objects, reading words, and generating simple phrases. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(10), 1764-1784.
Roelofs, A. (2008a). Attention to spoken word planning: Chronometric and neuroimaging evidence. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(3), 389-405.
Roelofs, A. (2008b). Tracing attention and the activation flow in spoken word planning using eye movements. J. Exp.Psychol.Learn.Mem. Cogn. 34, 353–368.
Roelofs, A., & Piai, V. (2011). Attention demands of spoken word planning: A review. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 12925.
Roelofs, A., Piai, V., & Schriefers, H. (2011). Selective attention and distractor frequency in naming performance: Comment on Dhooge and Hartsuiker (2010).
Roelofs, A., Piai, V., & Schriefers, H. (2013). Context effects and selective attention in picture naming and word reading: Competition versus response exclusion. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(5), 655-671.
Roelofs, A. (2013). WEAVER++ and other computational models of lemma retrieval and word-form encoding. In Aspects of language production (pp. 71-114). Psychology Press.
Roelofs, A. (2014). A dorsal-pathway account of aphasic language production: The WEAVERþþ/ARC model. cortex, 59.
Roelofs, A., & Piai, V. (2017). Distributional analysis of semantic interference in picture naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 782-792.
Roelofs, A. (2021). How attention controls naming: Lessons from Wundt 2.0. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(10), 1927.
Roelofs, A. (2021). Response competition better explains Stroop interference than does response exclusion. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28, 487-493.
Roelofs, A. (2022). A neurocognitive computational account of word production, comprehension, and repetition in primary progressive aphasia. Brain and Language, 227, 105094.
Roelofs, A. (2023). Modeling the attentional control of vocal utterances:: From Wernicke to WEAVER++/ARC. In The Routledge International Handbook of Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Processes (pp. 144-159). Routledge.
Roelofs, A. (2023). Word production and comprehension in frontotemporal degeneration: A neurocognitive computational Pickian account. cortex, 163, 42-56.
Roos, N. M., Takashima, A., & Piai, V. (2023a). Functional neuroanatomy of lexical access in contextually and visually guided spoken word production. cortex, 159, 254-267.
Roos, N., Chauvet, J., & Piai, V. (2023b). The concise language paradigm (CLaP), a framework for studying the intersection of comprehension and production: Electrophysiological properties.
Rosinski, R. R. (1977). Picture-word interference is semantically based. Child Development, 643-647.
Schriefers, H., Teruel, E., & Meinshausen, R. M. (1998). Producing simple sentences: Results from picture–word interference experiments. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(4), 609-632.
Shao, Z., Roelofs, A., Martin, R. C., & Meyer, A. S. (2015). Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color–word Stroop tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6), 1806.
Shapiro, K., Shelton, J., & Caramazza, A. (2000). Grammatical class in lexical production and morhpological processing: Evidence from a case of fluent aphasia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 17(8), 665-682.
Shapiro, K., & Caramazza, A. (2003). The representation of grammatical categories in the brain. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(5), 201-206.
Shapiro, K. A., Moo, L. R., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Cortical signatures of noun and verb production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(5), 1644-1649.
Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2008). Paying attention to reading: The neurobiology of reading and dyslexia. Development and psychopathology, 20(4), 1329-1349.
Starreveld, P.A., La Heij, W. (2017). Picture-word interference is a Stroop effect: A theoretical analysis and new empirical findings. Psychon BullRev, 24, 721-733.
Stemberger, J. P. (1985). An interactive activation model of language production. In Progress in the Psychology of Language.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of experimental psychology, 18(6), 643.
Tabossi, P., Collina, S., Caporali, A., Pizzoli, F., Basso, A. (2010). Speaking of events: The case of C.M. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 27(2), 152-180.
Van Maanen, L., & Van Rijn, H. (2008). The picture-word interference effect is a Stroop effect after all. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 30, No. 30).
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Lewis, W., & Garrett, M. F. (2004). Representing the meanings of object and action word: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 422-488.
Wohlert, A. B., & Larson, C. R. (1991). Cerebral averaged potentials preceding oral movement. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 34(6), 1387–1396.
Woodill, G., & Le Normand, M. T. (1995). Broca's discovery of brain localization in aphasia. Journal of developmental disabilities, 4, 50-62.
Wundt, W. (1900). DieSprache [Lan-guage]. Leipzig: Verlagvon Wilhelm Engelmann.
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2024 TOPIC - Temi di Psicologia dell'Ordine degli Psicologi della Campania
TQuesto lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.
Per le condizioni di licenza consultare il sito: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.it
(+39) 081402314
(+39) 081411617
PEC segreteria.oprc@psypec.it
segreteria@oprc.it